2/13/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK 79 Far,E 145 (A) Commercial development is not permitted. (B) Industrial development is not permitted. (C) Condominiums and multifamily developments are not permit- ted. (D) Even low density residential development is not permitted unless you happen to own at least a 40 acre parcel. These restrictions make Agricultural Lands the lowest value of any usable land within the County. This devaluation of land values reduces the borrowing power to the farmer, and effectively prohib- its the development of citrus and other agricultural uses. Such restrictions do not protect or promote agriculture. In reviewing the plan it appears that one -unit per -forty acre zoning has been applied where there is already a platted subdivi- sion (Fellsmere Farms Company Subdivision) which created 10 acre tracts (lots) back in 1913. This proposed rezoning will create many "non -conforming" uses of the property and deny the intended use of many individual land owners of these tracts. Now lets review the agriculture development of a parcel of land with respect to the existing and proposed preservation regulations. Typically the flatwood lands of Indian River County contain any- where from 15% to 40% environmentally sensitive lands which have to be protected undercurrent regulations. For citrus development, of the remaining 85% to 60% of uplands, storm water and irrigation/freeze protection management practices dictate that 10% to 15% must be placed in detention/ retention reservoir systems. Add to this the proposed 25% upland preservation requirement and you can see that a farmer can only plant 50% (or less) of his land to actual citrus. I can think of several agricultural projects now under planning and permitting stages that are economically stressed under current regulations that will become economically unviable - will not go forward - will not result in citrus development. The land owner will have no alternative, in many instances but to litigate for relief. In summary, through the process of planning and rules and regula- tions of various government agencies, presently undeveloped lands, without compensation to the owner, are required to shoulder the entire burden of promoting and protecting the public welfare. There is enough burden on undeveloped agricultural lands now without further restrictions, devaluation, and without taking an additional 25% and setting it aside for public welfare and benefit. It appears that undeveloped agricultural lands are being singled out, and are carrying out, an unreasonable burden of providing for the public benefit and welfare. Not only can you not develop the land for anything other than agricultural purposes, you can only develop approximately 50% of the land for agricultural purposes, and much of the remainder goes, without compensation to the land- owner, to serve the public interest. What has happened to the American concept of private ownership of property? What has hap- pened to the Constitutionally protected concept of no taking with- out just compensation? 38 _ M M